CASE · Clearance Adjudication Search EngineCASE

Loading case…

ISCR Case 22-01892 — CASE

Case record

ISCR Case 22-01892

A decided public DOHA case, shown for research — not advice or a prediction.

Case Profile
Decision Date2/17/2023
Statusdenied
LevelHEARING
TypeSTANDARD ISCR
Participants
Applicant Representation: Pro Se
Judge: Edward W. Loughran
Government Counsel: Jeff A. Nagel
Case Summary
The applicant in this case was a 40-year-old employee of a defense contractor who had been employed since January 2022 and was pursuing a college degree. The Department of Defense issued a Statement of Reasons (SOR) citing security concerns under Guideline F (financial considerations), primarily due to the applicant's inability to satisfy debts, including a charged-off loan of $29,476 from a credit union and a $416 debt to a cellular service provider.
During the proceedings, the applicant admitted to having financial difficulties stemming from a decline in sales-related income from 2008 to 2018, which led to several delinquent debts. He settled some debts prior to the SOR and resolved the $416 debt after the SOR was issued. However, he did not use proceeds from selling a boat to address the charged-off loan and delayed filing his 2018 tax returns until August 2022. The administrative judge found that while the applicant's financial situation had improved, the ongoing nature of his financial issues raised doubts about his reliability and judgment.
Ultimately, the administrative judge ruled against the applicant, concluding that he did not mitigate the financial considerations security concerns. The judge emphasized that the applicant's financial problems were recent and unresolved, which continued to cast doubt on his trustworthiness and suitability for a security clearance. Consequently, the applicant's eligibility for access to classified information was denied.
Guidelines Evaluated
- Guideline FFinancial Considerations · Against Applicant
Similar decisions
Other decisions whose allegations read most like this one. Descriptive similarity of the allegations only — not a prediction.
Finding similar decisions…

Case Headnote

ISCR Case No. 22-01892

deniedFeb 17, 2023· Hon. Edward W. Loughran· hearing

Summary

A 40-year-old defense contractor was denied a security clearance under Guideline F, Financial Considerations, due to unresolved financial issues. The Statement of Reasons cited a history of delinquent debts, specifically a charged-off loan from a credit union and a debt placed in collection by a cellular telephone services company. While the applicant did settle one debt of $416 for $249, paid on December 27, 2022, this action was insufficient to mitigate the overall concerns.

Disqualifying conditions related to financial problems and delinquent debts were raised. Although mitigating conditions concerning good-faith efforts to resolve debts and the circumstances surrounding the indebtedness were considered, they were not found to apply sufficiently.

The denial was based on the applicant's failure to demonstrate a good-faith effort to repay overdue creditors or resolve debts. The financial issues were deemed recent and ongoing, raising doubts about the applicant's reliability and trustworthiness. Furthermore, the applicant did not use proceeds from the sale of a boat to pay off a significant charged-off loan, contributing to the decision to deny the security clearance.

Why the Applicant Was Denied

The applicant did not demonstrate a good-faith effort to repay overdue creditors or resolve debts.
The applicant's financial issues are recent and ongoing, casting doubt on his reliability and trustworthiness.
The applicant failed to use proceeds from the sale of a boat to pay off a significant charged-off loan.

Conditions Referenced

Disqualifying

AG ¶ 19(a)appliedInability to Satisfy Debts
AG ¶ 19(c)appliedA History of Not Meeting Financial Obligations

Mitigating

AG ¶ 20(d)rejectedGood-faith Effort to Repay Overdue CreditorsThe applicant did not make a good-faith effort to pay his debts.
AG ¶ 20(b)rejectedConditions Beyond the Person's ControlThe applicant's financial problems were not shown to be largely beyond his control.

Key Rule Quoted

“Any doubt concerning personnel being considered for national security eligibility will be resolved in favor of the national security.”

Procedural Posture

SOR issuedOct 6, 2022
Answer filedOct 20, 2022
Hearing heldJan 4, 2023
Decision dateFeb 17, 2023

Cite For

Insufficient Evidence to Mitigate Financial Concerns Under Guideline F
Importance of Demonstrating Good-faith Efforts to Resolve Debts
Ongoing Financial Issues as a Basis for Denial of Security Clearance

Editorial summary generated for research. Not legal advice; not a prediction. Verify against the full decision before relying on any quoted language.

Standardized Decision Profile

SEAD-4 Guideline F · descriptive summary of a decided case

Posture: HearingDecided: denied

The judge found that the applicant has a significant charged-off loan from a credit union and a history of financial problems, which raised security concerns under Guideline F. While one debt was settled and mitigated, the overall financial situation was deemed insufficient to grant eligibility for a security clearance, resulting in a denial.

¶	Allegation	Finding	Type	Response	Disqualifying (¶19)	Mitigating applied (¶20)	Mitigation
1.a	Applicant has a history of financial problems and delinquent debts, including a charged-off loan from a credit union and a debt placed in collection by a cellular telephone services company. $29,476	Against Applicant	Unspecified Financial	Unknown	(a) inability to satisfy debts (c) a history of not meeting financial obligations	—	—
1.b	Applicant settled a $416 debt for $249, which was paid on December 27, 2022. $249	For Applicant	Credit Card Debt	Admitted	—	(b) conditions largely beyond the person’s control; acted responsibly	Credited Debt Paid in Full

Descriptive standardized rendering of a decided public case (Guideline F). The verbatim source decision is shown in full below.

Full decision

The complete, official text — footnotes and signatures included — is in the original PDF.